Looking back on your preliminary task, what do you feel you have learnt in the progression from it to

the full product?

Camerawork

In comparison to the preliminary task, the amount of shots that we used in the final product, were a lot more diverse. Also, the actual variety that we used increased, which was also the same for camera movements

In the preliminary task, there was one close-up shot that we slightly altered, but other than that, the rest of shots were simply shot without a change in angle. However, in our final product, my group and I realised that we could connote a lot about the character’s emotional and physical state through the use of different angles. For example, when the protagonist is seen inside of the elevator, a high angle is used to show him standing tall, which presents dominance. This feature gave the audience confidence within the protagonist, making them want to support him throughout the film.

In terms of shots, there were very few shots in the preliminary task. They were mainly wide-shots, medium-shots and close ups. The lack of more extreme and diverse framing meant that the final product wasn’t of very good quality, meaning that the audience wouldn’t be able to engage with it.

However, when planning out or final product, we ensured to utilise a wide variety of shots. The reason for this was that we knew it would help us to engage and excite the audience, creating something that was visually dynamic.

For example, we used a lot of shots that were close to the characters, as it maintained the attention of the audience as they always had something to focus on. This helped the audience to fully comprehend the storyline, and connect with the characters.

There were no camera movements in the preliminary task, meaning that it was extremely static and lacklustre. In the final product, we made sure that we used a wide variety of movements which helps to increase the pace. This was a vital

Marcus Stamp

factor for us as our genre was action, meaning past paced scenes had to be used, engaging the audience.

For example, panning shots were used when the protagonist was progressing down the hallways of the school building. Also, a low angle tracking shot was used to increase the pace and intensify the scene. These shots were used to reveal things and gain a sense of movement.

In terms of composition, the composition of our shots most definitely improved from the preliminary task. In the preliminary task, the shots used were framed very simply and were also too wide at times, meaning the audience could’ve lost focus on what they were meant to be looking at and paying attention to. However, in the final product, the framing improved massively. We placed the characters in the middle of the frame as much as possible, a reasonable distance away from the lens so that the background could be seen, but the character in frame was the main attraction.

Lastly, in the final product we included something that wasn’t used in the preliminary, which was depth of field. We used things such as focus pulls to great effect. We found that changing the depth of field was very effective as it made the production look a lot more realistic.

Editing

The editing in our final product looked a lot more sophisticated and realistic in comparison to the preliminary task. In the preliminary task, the events occur in chronological order, employing linear narrative. As not much happens (plot wise) in the preliminary task the end result is quite boring.

In our final product, we made our storyline a lot faster paced and exciting than the preliminary. We had a lot of short lasting clips, which intensified the scene, made it look faster and also allowed us to use a wider variety of shots, resulting in a better effect on the audience.

In the preliminary task, the transitions that were used were very basic and the majority of them were just jump cuts. We realised that jump cuts would be one of the most effective transitions as they increase pace of scenes, which was our original aim.

Marcus Stamp

In the final product, we used a small variety of transitions. These include little fades and dissolves, as it gave a sinister and tense effect. This was vital to establishing our opening sequence as an action thriller, also making it clear to the audience.

Another thing that (as editor) I experimented with in the final product, that was not used in the preliminary, which was colour. In the editing stages of production of our sequence, I decided to experiment with various colour corrections in order to give the films a more realistic look, as though it was a real film sequence produced by a top film company. The colour correction involved darkening the picture and also making light colours stick out more.

As you can see from the two pictures above, the picture on the left hand side is the colour corrected version. In comparison the right picture, you can see how the picture looks darker and sharper, whereas in the picture placed on the right, the lighting looks poor, making it look unprofessional.

Additionally we used sound to a much greater effect on the final product. In the preliminary task, the only sound used was the background noise in each shot that was taken and also the diegetic dialogue between the two characters in the classroom as they discussed homework. On the other hand, in our final product, we used non diegetic score music to intensify the scenes as the production progressed. Sound effects were also imported to support the situation going on, for example, a gunshot sound effect was used when the trigger was pulled in the production.

Marcus Stamp

180 Degree rule

In our preliminary task, we didn’t break the 180 Degree rule, which was part of the task that was set.

I feel whilst actually producing our final product, I managed to come to terms and fully understand the 180 Degree rule much better. As a result of this, in our final product, the rule wasn’t broken during a longer sequence with a wider variety of shots and angles.

However, to be honest, I still found it challenging at times to be sure if we were breaking the rule or not, especially when filming particular parts of our sequence, such as over the shoulder shots.

Match on Action

The match on action used in the preliminary task is rather undeveloped and limited. It also quite jagged, where clear stops and starts can be seen. Although it isn’t ENTIRELY clear, it can be seen after re-watching, meaning that the actions don’t flow smoothly. This problem may be due to the editing or shot itself.

In our final product, the match on action was much smoother and clean looking. Also we used a wider variety of shots for match on action, e.g. the shot where an extreme close up of each character’s face is shown before the trigger is pulled.

Smoother match on action increases the verisimilitude of our product, and also helps it to achieve a higher quality of presentation

ConclusionOverall, I think that we learnt a lot about the entire process of filming and editing since doing the preliminary task. With practice and research, our production came together well in the end. I am very pleased with the final product and enjoyed the experience that came along with it. If I was to do this again, I would probably experiment making a production with a different genre and also attempting different camera shots and angles using better equipment (such as a dolly).

Marcus Stamp